FN:s mänskorättsråd som i huvudsak verkar syssla med att fördöma Israel har lyckasts få en expertgrupp att komma till resultatet att Israels blockad av Gaza är olaglig. Tvärtemot vad den utredning som FN:s generalsekreterare beställt kom fram till.
Mänskorättsrådet konstaterade redan för ett år sedan att blockaden var olaglig och rådet har alltså redan två utredningar gällande Gazablockaden.
Det är klart, man kan inte utreda så mycket annat än det som Israel gör eftersom rådet domineras av stater där de mänskliga rättigheterna trampas under fötterna och därmed blir det aldrig någon undersökning eller fördömande av verkliga mänskorättsbrott.
Men dethär är naturligtvis inget nytt, så har det varit i många år.
UN experts: Israel's blockade of Gaza illegal
Visar inlägg med etikett FN:s mänskorättsråd. Visa alla inlägg
Visar inlägg med etikett FN:s mänskorättsråd. Visa alla inlägg
tisdag 13 september 2011
måndag 20 juni 2011
FN:s mänskorättsråd
En artikel av Anne Bayefski som beskriver det misslyckade mänskorättsrådet:
The anti-Israel agenda prevails
...With their actual human rights credentials off the table, council members adopted a fixed agenda of only a few items to govern their proceedings. One item is devoted to Israel alone and one to all other 191 UN member states. The Human Rights Commission spent 40 years adopting country-specific criticisms, a third of which condemned Israel. Fifty percent of the “reformed” council’s country-specific resolutions and decisions are devoted to Israel-bashing. There have been 12 special sessions in the last five years, and half of them have been on Israel alone. There has been only one “urgent debate” on a country – Israel. There have been more human rights reports commissioned on Israel than on any other state. And only one country is not allowed even to attend the lobbying and information-sharing regional meetings associated with the council sessions – Israel – while “Palestine” is invited to all of them....
The anti-Israel agenda prevails
...With their actual human rights credentials off the table, council members adopted a fixed agenda of only a few items to govern their proceedings. One item is devoted to Israel alone and one to all other 191 UN member states. The Human Rights Commission spent 40 years adopting country-specific criticisms, a third of which condemned Israel. Fifty percent of the “reformed” council’s country-specific resolutions and decisions are devoted to Israel-bashing. There have been 12 special sessions in the last five years, and half of them have been on Israel alone. There has been only one “urgent debate” on a country – Israel. There have been more human rights reports commissioned on Israel than on any other state. And only one country is not allowed even to attend the lobbying and information-sharing regional meetings associated with the council sessions – Israel – while “Palestine” is invited to all of them....
torsdag 1 april 2010
FN:s råd för fördömanden av Israel
Mats Tunehag skriver i en ledare i Världen idag om FN:s mänksorättsråd:FN:s absurda lekstuga
"För fyra år sedan omskapades FN-organet för mänskliga rättigheter: Kommissionen lades ned och rådet kom till. Uppgiften var densamma, att syna och granska mänskliga rättigheter i olika länder. Kommissionen lades ned eftersom den styrdes av diktaturer, ofta islamska, som bara kunde enas om att kritisera Israel, och se till att ingen eller ringa granskning eller kritik framkom angående världens värstingar – där islamska länder dominerar.Rådet skulle vara en nystart, felen skulle rättas till och demokratier och mänskliga rättigheter skulle nu få utrymme, sa man. Men icke. Den välbetalda diplomatiska absurda lekstugan fortsätter..."
Läs mera
"För fyra år sedan omskapades FN-organet för mänskliga rättigheter: Kommissionen lades ned och rådet kom till. Uppgiften var densamma, att syna och granska mänskliga rättigheter i olika länder. Kommissionen lades ned eftersom den styrdes av diktaturer, ofta islamska, som bara kunde enas om att kritisera Israel, och se till att ingen eller ringa granskning eller kritik framkom angående världens värstingar – där islamska länder dominerar.Rådet skulle vara en nystart, felen skulle rättas till och demokratier och mänskliga rättigheter skulle nu få utrymme, sa man. Men icke. Den välbetalda diplomatiska absurda lekstugan fortsätter..."
Läs mera
tisdag 21 april 2009
FN:s mänskorättsråd
Såhär går det till i FN:s mänskorättsråd. Rådets libyska ordförande försöker stoppa ett vittnesmål där en palestinsk läkare berättar hur han torterats i Libyen.
Från UN Watch hemsida:
Confrontation at Durban II
Tables Turned on Libyan Chair When Torture Victim Blasts Qaddafi HypocrisyMust-See Video: Head of U.N.’s “Anti-Racism” Conference Caught Like a Deer in HeadlightsToday Iranian President Ahmadinejad — the world’s leading Holocaust denier — will be in Geneva to address the U.N.’s “anti-racism” conference, known as Durban II. The U.N. gathering claims to be about fighting racism and discrimination, but in fact it’s organized by the world’s worst perpetrators of racism, discrimination and human rights abuses, and was designed to scapegoat Israel, America and the West. A representative of Libyan dictator Col. Muammar Qaddafi, Mrs. Najjat al-Hajjaji, chaired the Durban II Preparatory Committee for the past two years, and today was elected chair of the Durban II Main Committee.In an unprecedented coup, the rank hypocrisy of Durban II was exposed before the world this week when UN Watch surprised the Libyan chair — by bringing a victim of Qaddafi torture to confront her on Libya’s brutal torture and scapegoating of five Bulgairan nurses and a Palestinian doctor. The video clip
Från UN Watch hemsida:
Confrontation at Durban II
Tables Turned on Libyan Chair When Torture Victim Blasts Qaddafi HypocrisyMust-See Video: Head of U.N.’s “Anti-Racism” Conference Caught Like a Deer in HeadlightsToday Iranian President Ahmadinejad — the world’s leading Holocaust denier — will be in Geneva to address the U.N.’s “anti-racism” conference, known as Durban II. The U.N. gathering claims to be about fighting racism and discrimination, but in fact it’s organized by the world’s worst perpetrators of racism, discrimination and human rights abuses, and was designed to scapegoat Israel, America and the West. A representative of Libyan dictator Col. Muammar Qaddafi, Mrs. Najjat al-Hajjaji, chaired the Durban II Preparatory Committee for the past two years, and today was elected chair of the Durban II Main Committee.In an unprecedented coup, the rank hypocrisy of Durban II was exposed before the world this week when UN Watch surprised the Libyan chair — by bringing a victim of Qaddafi torture to confront her on Libya’s brutal torture and scapegoating of five Bulgairan nurses and a Palestinian doctor. The video clip
fredag 27 mars 2009
Kritik av religion förbjuds av FN
Nu finns det FN beslut på att det är förbjudet att kritisera islam.Beslutet togs i går i FN:s mänskorättsråd i Geneve. De europeiska staterna röstade emot förslaget men det är de islamska staterna som bestämmer i rådet.
För röstade: Angola, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Cameroon, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Gabon, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, and South Africa.
Mot förslaget röstade: Canada, Chile, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Slovakia, Slovenia, Switzerland, Ukraine, and United Kingdom.
Följande stater lade ner sina röster:Argentina, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Ghana, India, Japan, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mexico, Republic of Korea, Uruguay, and Zambia.
Mera kan läsas här: Action on Draft Resolution on Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Forms of Intolerance
In a resolution (A/HRC/10/L.2/Rev.1) on combating defamation of religions...
Tysklands och Kanadas inlägg:
KONRAD SCHARINGER ( Germany ), speaking on behalf of the European Union , said that the European Union firmly believed in the freedom of expression and freedom of belief. The European Union also thought that dialogue could help to overcome difference. However, it regretted that such dialogue did not take place in the Council. The European Union thought it was problematic to reconcile defamation with discrimination. Discrimination clearly fell within the scope of human rights. It had to be stressed that the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights firmly forbade any form of incitement of religious hatred. A broader and firmly rights based text would be better in that context. Defamation of religion should not be addressed within a human rights approach. Specific religions should not protected. The European Union condemned instances of Islamophobia, Chrisitianophobia and other religious hatred and invited others to show their commitment to combat religious intolerance. The European Union stressed that religious hatred was worldwide and not limited to certain religions and beliefs. The European Union would vote against the text.
TERRY CORMIER ( Canada ), speaking in an explanation of the vote before the vote, expressed appreciation to Pakistan for the open consultation held, and in which Canada had engaged in and voiced concerns in a constructive manner, and in order to help bridge understanding in the Council. It was a matter of great concern all over the world. The harmful stereotyping of persons based on religion or belief should be denounced. Canada condemned all forms of religious hatred and called on all States to adhere to tolerance of all religions, cultures and ethnicities around the world. Canada said it was an individual who had rights and hence defamation of religion as an issue discussed under the Human Rights Council was beyond its scope and would jeopardize freedom of expression. In addition, the current resolution continued to focus on one religion above all others. For those reasons, among others, Canada would vote against the draft resolution.
För röstade: Angola, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Cameroon, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Gabon, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, and South Africa.
Mot förslaget röstade: Canada, Chile, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Slovakia, Slovenia, Switzerland, Ukraine, and United Kingdom.
Följande stater lade ner sina röster:Argentina, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Ghana, India, Japan, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mexico, Republic of Korea, Uruguay, and Zambia.
Mera kan läsas här: Action on Draft Resolution on Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Forms of Intolerance
In a resolution (A/HRC/10/L.2/Rev.1) on combating defamation of religions...
Tysklands och Kanadas inlägg:
KONRAD SCHARINGER ( Germany ), speaking on behalf of the European Union , said that the European Union firmly believed in the freedom of expression and freedom of belief. The European Union also thought that dialogue could help to overcome difference. However, it regretted that such dialogue did not take place in the Council. The European Union thought it was problematic to reconcile defamation with discrimination. Discrimination clearly fell within the scope of human rights. It had to be stressed that the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights firmly forbade any form of incitement of religious hatred. A broader and firmly rights based text would be better in that context. Defamation of religion should not be addressed within a human rights approach. Specific religions should not protected. The European Union condemned instances of Islamophobia, Chrisitianophobia and other religious hatred and invited others to show their commitment to combat religious intolerance. The European Union stressed that religious hatred was worldwide and not limited to certain religions and beliefs. The European Union would vote against the text.
TERRY CORMIER ( Canada ), speaking in an explanation of the vote before the vote, expressed appreciation to Pakistan for the open consultation held, and in which Canada had engaged in and voiced concerns in a constructive manner, and in order to help bridge understanding in the Council. It was a matter of great concern all over the world. The harmful stereotyping of persons based on religion or belief should be denounced. Canada condemned all forms of religious hatred and called on all States to adhere to tolerance of all religions, cultures and ethnicities around the world. Canada said it was an individual who had rights and hence defamation of religion as an issue discussed under the Human Rights Council was beyond its scope and would jeopardize freedom of expression. In addition, the current resolution continued to focus on one religion above all others. For those reasons, among others, Canada would vote against the draft resolution.
WJC blasts UNHRC religious criticism resolution
tisdag 8 juli 2008
Video som visar hur FN:s mänskorättsråd misslyckats
Eye on the UN har sammanställt några videoklipp som visar hur de islamska länderna förhindrar att de kritiseras i FN:s männskorättsråd.
Det verkar som om barn som leker i sandlådan är värd mera förtroende än mänskorättsrådet.
UN Human Rights Council: Sharia'h Law Now Sacrosanct, Part 1 June 16, 2008:
The UN Human Rights Council decides criticism of human rights violations under Sharia'h law is out of order
Part 2
Part 3
UN Human Rights Council: Silencing Critics of Islamic Extremism (6) June 16, 2008:
The real UN double-standards - harassing, intimidating and silencing critics of Islamic states, Islamic terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism
Part 7
UN Human Rights Council: New and Not Improved, Part 1 June 13, 2008:
The New Universal Periodic Review (UPR) Process of the Human Rights Council - Human Rights Protection Gone Wrong
Part 2
Part 3
Det verkar som om barn som leker i sandlådan är värd mera förtroende än mänskorättsrådet.
UN Human Rights Council: Sharia'h Law Now Sacrosanct, Part 1 June 16, 2008:
The UN Human Rights Council decides criticism of human rights violations under Sharia'h law is out of order
Part 2
Part 3
UN Human Rights Council: Silencing Critics of Islamic Extremism (6) June 16, 2008:
The real UN double-standards - harassing, intimidating and silencing critics of Islamic states, Islamic terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism
Part 7
UN Human Rights Council: New and Not Improved, Part 1 June 13, 2008:
The New Universal Periodic Review (UPR) Process of the Human Rights Council - Human Rights Protection Gone Wrong
Part 2
Part 3
Prenumerera på:
Inlägg (Atom)